Quite extraordinary @POTUS speech #MSC2021. V liberal hawk. 🌍view basically ideological - systemic clash b/democs vs. authoritarians, *both* 🇨🇳&🇷🇺. Strategy based on big big bet that democs will align, yet signal is burden-sharing talk is hortatory. 1/
Don't take it from me. Here's @POTUS: "We are in a fundamental debate about the future & direction of our world. We’re at an inflection point b/ those who argue that autocracy is the best way forward & those who understand that democracy is essential..." 2/
"I believe that — every ounce of my being — that democracy will and must prevail. We must demonstrate that democracies can still deliver for our people in this changed world. That, in my view, is our galvanizing mission. 3/
Closing point: "So let’s get together and demonstrate to our great, great grandchildren, when they read about us, that democracy — democracy — democracy functions and works, and together, there is nothing we can’t do. So let’s get working." He repeated "democracy" 3 times. 4/
Stated in "a long-term strategic competition with China" but also: "The challenges with Russia may be different than the ones with China, but they’re just as real." So simultaneous pretty competitive if not adversarial view of *both* 🇨🇳&🇷🇺. 5/
That's a lot! To fill the gap: "I hope our fellow democracies are going to join us in this vital work..." Especially "the cornerstone," the partnership w/Europe. So that's a v clear ask that Europe *fully* join in aligning w/US vis a vis authoritarian states. 6/
Logic is based on "shared values...vision of future" since alliances "are not transactional." Clearly *not* relying on any pressure. To "erase any lingering doubt" @POTUS stated wld halt any caps on troops/ withdrawals from FRG & lauded thanked Europe for + defense efforts. 7/
& to boot signaled caution/slowdown re Afgh drawdown: "We remain committed to ensuring that Afghanistan never again provides a base for terrorist attacks against the United States and our partners and our interests." 8/
2 *really* striking things about this speech. 1) Confidence - almost sanguinity - about ability to deal w/China challenge et al. "[T]ogether, there is nothing we can’t do." Has a 1990s feel where it's really a matter of will, above all for US. Yet: bbc.com/news/world-asi…. 9/
FWIW, I believe US can achieve its reasonable aims in 🌍 despite China's rise, but it's a huge, huge deal & challenge. @POTUS speech has the sense of a world where US is still indisputably the hyperpower. It's just a matter of us getting our house in order. 10/
2) Deep faith in democracies willingness to align in v meaningful ways. @POTUS clearly *really* believes this. Color me skeptical that Europe will meet this standard. But I guess we'll see! 11/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's one thing to think last Admin was too tough on allies re burden sharing. But it doesn't make sense to go back to *saying* allies needed to do more but *clearly telegraphing* there will be little to no consequences for failing to shoulder their part of the burden. Some egs 1/
SD "charms NATO allies" & "mood lovey-dovey" according to @herszenhorn. "US sounded like friend...felt refreshing... participants in the meeting said." SD "emphasized that [allies'] contributions are also measured by how used, not just by size." 2/
SD "offered a message of thanks and urged [allies] to keep up the good work." Does that sound like pressure on allies to spend more? Not to me. Sounds like telegraphing 0 consequences for free-riding. How's that going to enable focus on PRC/Asia? How's that fair to Americans? 3/
There is some valuable analysis in this report, but on the defense front this report is deeply flawed. There are other sections of value in report but, candidly, I don't think it helps us think through critical question of Taiwan defense issues in clear & well-grounded way. 1/
Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/
BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/
I make the case why Taiwan is defensible & why US shld defend it in @WSJopinion: wsj.com/articles/ameri…. No 2 ways abt it: V. tough to do, BUT can be done IF it's overriding DOD priority. Esp crucial w/new admin, assertive PRC & many influential voices saying it's impossible. 1/
Defending Taiwan key for 2 reasons: 1) critical geography in first island chain; otherwise China can project power freely into WestPac; 2) US differentiated credibility - US word clearly on the line in Asia ilo TRA, 6 Assurncs, long record of standing w TWN agnst PRC coercion. 2/
For these reasons, the recently declassified 2018 Indo-Pacific strategy specifically ordered the Pentagon to implement a defense strategy that will make the U.S. capable of defending Taiwan.
.@HawleyMO (seems fair to see as his own agenda): Christians "ought to be working not merely for a bigger economy, but for a better one..." 1/ patheos.com/blogs/philosop…
"Too many workers with less than a college education simply cannot find work in today’s marketplace—or cannot find work sufficient to support themselves or a family. This must change. Labor & the ability to earn one’s own way, is central to dignity and indeed, to vocation." 2/
"Christians should seek to broaden the private economy to include more individuals in remunerative labor....focus on expanding opportunities for the poor and marginalized, with better primary and secondary schools, for example, and expanded access to vocational training." 3/
"What makes Hawley harder to place on the ideological spectrum is that he isn’t merely less doctrinaire or “more liberal” than other Repubs. When he shares common ground with far-left Dems, it isn’t because he went looking for it on a quest for moderation for its own sake..." 1/
Hawley wrote in his TR intellectual bio: "'Roosevelt knew two things worth remembering that contemporary Americans have forgotten,” one being that “liberty is a fundamentally social undertaking.” In other words, a simple absence of government & other well-functioning..." 2/
...social institutions does not produce free men. Second, politics is a “profoundly moral enterprise...Questions about what economic or social welfare policies we should adopt are really questions about what sort of people we want to become.” 3/
“It is hard not to view it as a geopolitical gift to Beijing and slap in the face to an incoming Biden administration that has vowed to repair trans-Atlantic ties and work more closely with Europe on the strategic challenges posed by China...” 1/
“Finally, Merkel sees Germany as a mediating force in the escalating confrontation between the United States and China... Merkel still sees gray—and not only with China.” Just a note that mediator doesn’t = ally...2/
“Merkel’s approach to China no longer reflects the consensus in Germany or in Europe, where positions have hardened substantially over the past year.” 👍 3/